I personally like C# more than C++ as well. What Tyler is trying to tell you though is that C# is not a .net exclusive language. Meaning, C# doesn't specifically have to be for .NET. C# as a language is an open-standard, meaning, you can freely download the language specification and create your own compiler for it! That is something I find totally ironic, because the C++ standard costs money (the -real- standard from both ISO and ANSI). You don't have to support the .NET framework, and you can make your compiler spit out native binaries.
C# was created so that .NET could be shown off, yeah. But the actual language (don't confuse "C# -- the language" with "Microsoft Visual C#.NET -- the compiler") is platform independent. In all practicality though, you'll most likely be using C# with .NET.
On 6/22/2011 9:58 AM, Katherine Moss wrote:
I guess because I think that the language is more easily understood. C++ has some extra syntactical things that are a bit hard to get used to. And I also prefer C# because it was built for the .net framework, so the framework's offered services can integrate directly with it, and in order to get the same benefits with C++, the use of C++/CLI has been required, hasn't it? Guys, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I've always thought that C# was a language built specifically for the .net framework. And it's prettier than most others.*From:*programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Littlefield, Tyler*Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2011 12:35 PM *To:* programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx*Subject:* Re: Windows 8, could .net loyalists be losing out? I'd like some opinions on this if you guys don't mindWhy do you prefer c# over c++? And this is c#, not c# and the .net framework.Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_mode On 6/22/2011 10:24 AM, Katherine Moss wrote:I guess it's just a preference thing. I prefer C# over C++. And then what do you mean by real mode? I'm confused. And I didn't know that COSMOS didn't use the .net framework. I had always thought they did.*From:* programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Littlefield, Tyler*Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2011 12:18 PM*To:* programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *Subject:* Re: Windows 8, could .net loyalists be losing out? I'd like some opinions on this if you guys don't mindCan you tell me what the point would be, in throwing out millions of lines of code written in c, assembler and probably a couple others to write everything in c#? C# isn't even really a .net language, as cosmos didn't use the .net framework. When it's just you and real mode, you don't have any .net framework to use; you don't even get the CRT. More to the point, what would be gained by writing everything in pure c# and throwing away that much code?On 6/22/2011 10:08 AM, Katherine Moss wrote:What would be Awesome is if .net then had an interop feature for the new HTML/JS interface they're trying to support. But the thing that stumps me big time is why in the world the new incarnation of the Windows OS couldn't be based on .net languages purely. Haven't you folks heard of the Singularity project? That and then the projects that came after it such as COSMOS, SharpOS, and then one other which I forget the name of right now.*From:* programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Ken Perry*Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2011 6:28 AM*To:* programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *Subject:* RE: Windows 8, could .net loyalists be losing out? I'd like some opinions on this if you guys don't mindActually all the article says is if you want to use the new api you have to use the html and javascript stuff. Well there is plenty of old api's that I think Microsoft is going to continue to support but I guess we will wait and see.Ken*From:* programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Christopher Coale*Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2011 12:07 AM*To:* programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *Subject:* Re: Windows 8, could .net loyalists be losing out? I'd like some opinions on this if you guys don't mindIt (and the whole discussion here) came across as Microsoft dropping .NET as one of their products. If this was not the argument, then that's fine.On 6/21/2011 7:14 PM, Sina Bahram wrote:I think that you're falling trap to extending a lack of support for .net as a first class citizen for the desktop application space in Windows 8, to Microsoft as a corporation dropping support for .net.These are very distinct issues.The article implies one, the former, and it most certainly doesn't state any certainty or evidence about the latter.*From:* programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Christopher Coale*Sent:* Tuesday, June 21, 2011 9:53 PM*To:* programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *Subject:* Re: Windows 8, could .net loyalists be losing out? I'd like some opinions on this if you guys don't mindI dislike that article. Think about this logically, first. If Microsoft were to drop support for .NET, that also means they would have to drop support for WPF, Zune/Mobile applications and games, Xbox 360 user games and XNA, many components from Visual Studio 2010 as well as all of the .NET languages they have heavily invested money and time into. Even if you can't think about it logically, think about it logistically. You really think that Microsoft would drop -multiple- and very welcomed development environments in which they have invested millions of dollars and many hours, only for it to be replaced by a "development platform" that has not even been tested in the marketplace? Come on... look at the history of Microsoft as well. When .NET first came out, Microsoft gradually released it -- it didn't totally trump the Windows API. Look at WPF -- WPF did not totally trump WinForms, and it was gradually released. Microsoft is not stupid enough to suddenly and totally drop support for such a popular and widely used platform.On 6/21/2011 5:52 PM, Sina Bahram wrote:http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/06/html5-centric-windows-8-leaves-microsoft-developers-horrified.arsenjoy take care, Sina*From:* programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Christopher Coale*Sent:* Tuesday, June 21, 2011 6:01 PM*To:* programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *Subject:* Re: Windows 8, could .net loyalists be losing out? I'd like some opinions on this if you guys don't mindWhat do you mean Microsoft would let .NET die? .NET is one of their larger endeavors, and is now as popular as (if not more popular than) Java. So, for Microsoft to just let .NET die would be an absolutely moronic move on their part. .NET isn't going anywhere anytime soon...On 6/21/2011 2:57 PM, Katherine Moss wrote: Hello all,I was just reading a thread that has been since locked over at Silverlight.net. I was wondering what you folks think in terms of who's telling the truth when it comes to Windows 8. You think it's the MS folks, or do you think that they will just let .net and Silverlight die? Thanks.--Take care,Ty my website:http://tds-solutions.net my blog: http://tds-solutions.net/blog skype: st8amnd127My programs don't have bugs; they're randomly added features! --Take care,Ty my website: http://tds-solutions.net my blog: http://tds-solutions.net/blog skype: st8amnd127 My programs don't have bugs; they're randomly added features!
